What a Waste

[AdamS]

This film was a total waste.

Christine was the first Stephen King book I read. I was about 14 years old (or somewhere in that vicinity) and needless to stay, I was up way past my bedtime to finish the book within three days. I haven't stopped reading Stephen King since.

I got the movie shortly after reading the book and knowing that John Carpenter is one of the great horror directors, was expecting a classic.

Boy, was I disappointed.

I could go on all day naming the flaws with the film, but the most glaring one is the fact that the book's most intriguing character (Roland LeBay) was written out completely.

Terrible, terrible film.

Anybody else feel the same way?

[Mr. Palmer]

CHRISTINE is my favorite Sai King book. And, I have to admit, that I enjoy the film, too. Of course, I'm a sucker for anything Carpy does, so...

[Bryan James]

The flick is what I call a "Good Sunday Hangover Movie." It distracts you from the realization of what you did the night before and how you currently feel. It ain't great art.

I've seen it a few times.

~BJS

[dejolane]

This film was a total waste.

Christine was the first Stephen King book I read. I was about 14 years old (or somewhere in that vicinity) and needless to stay, I was up way past my bedtime to finish the book within three days. I haven't stopped reading Stephen King since.

I got the movie shortly after reading the book and knowing that John Carpenter is one of the great horror directors, was expecting a classic.

Boy, was I disappointed.

I could go on all day naming the flaws with the film, but the most glaring one is the fact that the book's most intriguing character (Roland LeBay) was written out completely.

Terrible, terrible film.

Anybody else feel the same way?

Apparently you & I don't feel the same way. I loved the book and the movie was even better.

[aptpupil]

I would tend to agree that Christine as a movie didn't measure up to the novel.

I don't actually think that most SK novels with a supernatural element do tend to measure up as movies, TBH.

The best adaptations are things like Shawshank, Misery and Stand By Me, which have no supernatural element whatever. :eyebrow:

[JohnDalglish]

I would tend to agree that Christine as a movie didn't measure up to the novel.

I don't actually think that most SK novels with a supernatural element do tend to measure up as movies, TBH.

The best adaptations are things like Shawshank, Misery and Stand By Me, which have no supernatural element whatever. :eyebrow:

Hi,

While I agree with you completely about the 'supernatural element' (best served by prose and the imagination IMO), Drew, I thought it was great to actually see Christine (not too many 57 Plymouths in the West of Scotland, are there?).

Long days and pleasant nights

[AdamS]

I would tend to agree that Christine as a movie didn't measure up to the novel.

I don't actually think that most SK novels with a supernatural element do tend to measure up as movies, TBH.

The best adaptations are things like Shawshank, Misery and Stand By Me, which have no supernatural element whatever. :eyebrow:

That's a great point, but you also have to take into account films such as The Shining and Carrie which are masterpieces.

With that said, you can't beat The Shawshank Redemption, Stand By Me, or The Green Mile.

[hipmamajen]

I just read Christine, which I haven't done since it came out in paperback. I was in junior high, so it's been a while...

I was thinking of picking up the movie, and now I think I have to! I saw it way back in the day, too, but I was a youngun' and I don't trust my judgment from the time. As I recall, I was bored with everything that didn't involve someone getting squished by the car. I'd like to think my tastes are somewhat more refined now... :rolleyes:

It'll be interesting in light of the split decision here.

[kingwoman36]

Hi all i agree the movies Christine was awesome but i never read the book

[Mugwomp]

Loved the movie. Back the John Carpenter good days, when he was making great films.

[jules17330]

Christine is my favorite SK book. It was the first book I picked up by SK, (I was around 8 years old at the time) and I read it on an average of once a year, every year. Much of it I have memorized and I love the characters and the struggles they face. With that being said, I thought the movie was just okay. It wasn't JC's best and it wasn't his worst either. Whenever I watch it, which isn't too often, I have to remind myself that this is an old movie and not up to today's expected standards. But even though the movie was just so-so, seeing that red on white paint job on that beautiful car still makes me smile. They could have definetly done justice to Roland D. Lebay's name (why on earth did they use his brother's name???) and there were a few other differences that I would have corrected but I don't think it's a terrible waste.

[hipmamajen]

OK, I was able to catch Christine and I was kind of disappointed. To me, most of the book was about Dennis watching the changes in Arnie and mourning their childhood and their easy relationship from back in the day, even though it was complicated before Christine came along. The movie was all about the evil car, and she wasn't really even evil in the same way as she was in the book. For instance, she could regenerate herself without needing to roll or be pushed, which pretty much takes her need for Arnie out of the picture.

Obviously a lot of things from the book would need to be changed to make a movie, both because of the special effects limitations of the day and time constraints, etc. Most of that stuff made sense, and was expected. There was one scene I really missed, though, and would love to see it added back in if the movie is ever remade. It's the scene where Dennis and Arnie are "motorvating" in Christine and Dennis sees the town slipping between the 1950s and 1970s, and the creepy visions inside the car. I LOVED that part! :)

It seems to me like it was just one of the "filler" horror films of its time, and could have been given a much smarter treatment.

[annetacey]

im currently re-reading Christine and i have seen the film. Both are excellent but the book was best,having said that the film wasnt a waste at all, u cant have every single film of his a "Shawshank" or "Green mile"(bloomin great cinema).

[Christiane17]

Christine was very dissapointing for me as far as the movie addaptation was concerned. Not a great movie, but some parts of it were quite interesting when the car appeared, like when it got out of its misery and became brand new. Also when Arnie's girl friend Leigh almost choked to death. I dont like to see people choke.

I was just wondering, talking about cars, if any of you had seen the movie THE CAR with James Brolin. That one was scary, and the car was the creepiest piece of metal I have ever seen. Still hears the sound of the engine of it and it's pam papapammm!!! :oo: The movie was made in the seventies and it could have been a SK story, which I thought was in the first place. It was not actually.:sad:

[Ebony]

IN my opinion, the book is much better as the movie (as usual)
but you have more time to read a book than to watch a movie...;)

[Perse Jr.]

I really enjoyed the book AND the movie. I've seen the movies several times; if you view it without comparing it to the book (which is pretty much what you have to do for any adaptation) it's pretty entertaining.

[Bev Vincent]

You have to think of the film in context, too. The special effects involved in having the car repair itself were amazing at the time. They used air bladders and all sorts of live-camera tricks to make those things happen. Nowadays, a skilled kid with a decent computer could make that happen in his basement. So there's a lot of time devoted to the FX, perhaps at the expense of the characters at times.

[bugaboosy]

i think the big thing you are forgetting is when christine was made there simply wasnt the special effects stuff around as there is today ..personally i like the movie ...love the way she fixed herself up but watching now as compared to then i would say its dated and i bet there are even better things they could do with effects now :)
IMO i think the majority of SK books/movies live better in ones head!! nothing lives up to a persons imagination and when it meets reality there is always going to be someone who didnt see it like that in their head.

[gopher26]

Hi. I have to say that Christine, Cujo, Dead Zone were not as good as The Green Mile or even Rose Red. I also believe that it aslo depends on who directs the movie. Most novels are better than the movie itself.

[Nemesis44UK]

I think that the book was simply amazing and it remains my favourite SK book ever. The writing is so evocative and the characters are well rounded and realistic. When I saw the film for the first time, I was utterly disappointed. It was very different to the book, with characters missing or amalgamated. The Will Darnell killing was particularly poor compared to the book version. However, John Carpenter once defended his movie saying: "The reason the film didn't do well [at the box office] is because the characters are not special, they are very ordinary" (I'm paraphrasing). Having seen the film several times since, I would have to say that it has grown on me and stands quite well on it's own two feet. Particular highlights are the amazing special effects (no CGI back then, baby!) Buddy Repperton's flaming corpse and frankly, just to see that beautiful Plymouth in all it's glory.

[spanishjoe74]

i agree that it isn't one of the best adaptations of an sk novel, but,like its been said, it was filmed before cgi & that will have made it hard to do the story true justice in respects of some of the events in the book. having said that, given hollywood's habit of remaking films, surely its about time one of the studios had another crack at it. with a decent budget & director on board i'm sure they would have a blockbuster on their hands.